I’d say Element is the one to go for. A list of clients is available here:
https://matrix.org/ecosystem/clients/

I really wish the culture on lemmy would evolve to include a short summary of the content and a reason for sharing a link instead of just posting a link without context.

https://support.gog.com/hc/en-us/articles/212184449-What-payment-methods-and-currencies-do-you-accept-and-where?product=gog

I’m fortunate that nearly all of my close friends own something I’ve made. But online? In comment sections? In all the loud posturing about the impending AI takeover?

I keep coming back to the same question:

When was the last time you bought something directly from an artist?

While I understand the sentiment I think focusing the buy to be directly from an artist is a bit weird.
Does me visiting the local theatre not count?
Does me buying a vinyl with music not count (none of my musician friends has the tools to make vinyls, that’s for sure)?
Does me buying an older oil painting from the local auction not count?
Does me buying a 4k UHD movie not count?
Do I not support an artist when I buy the poster they designed as a commission from the company that sold it? (Kirsten Tinds posters of edible plants and berries and so on sold through Koustrup & Co. are gorgeous: http://www.kirstentind.dk/Plakater_og_Kortmapper.html)

Gemma 4 12b unified as a q6 gguf fits with about 24k context inside your vram. koboldcpp+sillytavern works well on the software side.

Meanwhile at the Microsoft Store

Congrats! Then you have a guide for an easy reverse proxy right inside your router. :)
Try it out and see if that doesn’t fit you better than the nginx proxy manager.

The main point was that if your mini-pc running the proxy is also behind a windows docker desktop install it too will have incoming connections appear as 192.168.65.1.

A solution then is to switch to a linux docker host where you can get rid of that hidden NAT. There are many webuis for docker such as dockge and portainer on linux without having to use the terminal.

My preffered solution would be to switch to a router/firewall with reverse proxy support such as opnsense with haproxy and skip the nginx proxy manager completely.
Having the proxy configured in the same UI as vlan, port forwarding, nat rules and so on is nice. https://opnsenselab.com/posts/opnsense-haproxy-reverse-proxy/

Long shot but you might’ve solved the nginx x-forwarded header multiple times without seeing it if the nginx proxy is behind the same bridged docker desktop system setup on your minipc then the visitors IP will show as 192.168.65.1 to the nginx proxy too so you forward that same ip to jellyfin even when it works.
An easy check would be to spin up nginx as a vm instead of a nginx reverse proxy docker image and see if it works.

No real solution, but a lot of chatter regarding that:
https://github.com/NginxProxyManager/nginx-proxy-manager/issues/674

Nicely done! :)

My loading of indianexpress.com is a lot faster in firefox than yours, the main thing is that the account.google.com loads normally for me:

Timings for the .js from account.google.com:

Ah, neither my office nor my home is plagued by cgnat. That would certainly make a difference in options.

Interesting and it seems to be accounts.google.com that is the culprit, no idea why that loads on indianexpress.com though. It’d be interesting to see if it’s the common denominator in slowing your firefox down.

You can always contact techaro.lol and ask if they’re willing to setup a secondary domain for you.

Or you can use others endorsements of the product to give it weight.
"The Linux Foundation uses Anubis to protect git.kernel.org and lore.kernel.org and seem very satisfied with the result.
For the low cost of 50USD/Month we get a custom branded version of it.

• https://social.kernel.org/objects/1bb84190-f207-4adc-ac0e-8eb87a8a60f9"

I imagine Anubis looking like that is because professional settings really should sponsor when using open source.
https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/botstopper/
https://github.com/sponsors/Xe

Having european alternatives is great but honestly for private repos I’d rather just spin up a Forgejo instance myself on my own hardware.

https://docs.docker.com/desktop/features/networking/#how-containers-connect-to-the-internet
I think your discord friends are right.

Outbound traffic from the container is sent through Network Address Translation (NAT) using a virtual adapter (typically with an internal IP such as 192.168.65.3). You can view or change this with the Docker Desktop settings.

Have you used hyprland before?
Have you used quickshell before?
Have you used Artix before?
What other distros have you used?

Reading through the docs is always a good start. :)
https://wiki.artixlinux.org/Main/Installation
https://wiki.hypr.land/Getting-Started/
https://quickshell.org/docs/v0.3.2/guide/

I’d rather neither collect my data, but in this case it’s worse than that.

Hreszczuk runs Fortify Labs in Canberra and specialises in car security. His job was simple: find out what BYD, or anyone with access to BYD’s systems in China, could see and do to the vehicle remotely. He didn’t expect it to be quick.

“It was easier than we were expecting.” Hreszczuk says.

That wasn’t just an offhand comment. Hreszczuk makes a living finding ways to break into cars, so the fact that he was surprised by how easy it was is significant. Even he didn’t expect to get access so quickly or find so little standing in his way.

The entry point had no password at all. There was nothing protecting it. That one weakness gave Hreszczuk a way into the software that controls many of the car’s functions. After spending two weeks exploring the system and testing what he could do, he was ready to show the results in a real-world demonstration.
“Sitting by the side of the country road, he demonstrates what can be done with remote access to a vehicle. First, he locks the doors while I’m inside, blasts music over the speakers and plays images on the BYD’s giant infotainment screen.” reads the report published by ABC News. “Then, as I drive, he remotely switches the wipers on at top speed, sprays the windscreen with water and turns the lights on and off.”

While Four Corners reporter Angus Grigg was driving the BYD at about 30 km/h along a straight country road, Hreszczuk controlled parts of the vehicle from his laptop. He locked the doors remotely, turned up the music through the speakers and displayed random images on the infotainment screen. He then switched the windscreen wipers to their highest setting, sprayed the windscreen and repeatedly turned the headlights on and off. At the same time, a recorded voice played through the speakers, warning the driver to use low beam.

Then things became more serious. Hreszczuk switched the headlights off completely while Grigg was still driving the car in the dark.

He was not able to control everything. The brakes and cameras were protected by stronger security measures, so he could not access them. But the test still showed what could happen if someone gained remote access to a connected vehicle. Imagine the same attack taking place at 100 km/h, on a winding road at night, with the driver suddenly losing control of the lights and having the wipers running at full speed. The potential danger is obvious.

• https://securityaffairs.com/199460/hacking/a-byd-shark-6-hack-shows-the-risks-of-connected-cars.html

I’m not sure I’d want a BYD either…